Cleanser that is gentle to human skin

ABSTRACT

Compositions for cleansing are disclosed that are not irritating to human skin. A composition is disclosed that includes at least 2% of a mixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, at least 3% of a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, at least 1% of an amphoteric surfactant, at least 0.05% of an alkyl glucoside, and at least 0.005% of a phospholipid. A composition for cleansing is disclosed that includes about 2% to 70% of a mixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, about 3% to 40% of a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, about 1% to 40% of an amphoteric surfactant, about 0.05% to 10% of an alkyl glucoside, and about 0.005% to 10% of a phospholipid. A cleansing composition is further disclosed that includes about 41% of a mixture of alkyl sulfoacetate and ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, about 34% of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, about 22% of an amphoteric surfactant, about 2% of a alkyl glucoside, and about 0.5% of a phospholipid. A composition for cleansing is also described which includes about 2% to 50% of a mixture of a salt of a sodium lauryl sulfoacetate and Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate, about 3% to 35% of Ammonium Laureth Sulfate, about 1% to 30% of Cocamidopropyl Betaine, about 0.05% to 8% of Coco-Glucoside and Coconut Oil, and about 0.005% to 5% of a phospholipid. A method of cleaning is also described, which includes contacting a surface to be cleansed with the composition of the invention. The composition can be used in a variety of personal care or household cleansers, such as contact lens care products, shampoos, soaps, body washes, mouthwashes, toothpastes, oral rinses, facial and wound cleansers, eye makeup removers, laundry and dishwashing detergents, and others.

PRIORITY CLAIM

This is a §371 U.S. national stage of PCT/US00/41002, filed Sep. 26,2000, which was published in English under PCT Article 21(2), and claimsthe benefit of U.S. application Ser. No. 60/156,137, filed Sep. 27,1999.

FIELD OF THE INVENTION

This invention relates to methods and preparations for cleansing,specifically to methods and compositions that do not irritate the skin.

BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION

Cleansing products come in many types and forms, but are generallydivided into personal care cleansers and household cleansers. Thepersonal care cleansers most commonly thought of by consumers are skincleansers (including bar soaps) and shampoos. However, this class ofproduct also includes body washes, personal hygiene cleansers, contactlens cleansers, dental cleansers, facial cleansers, and makeup removers(including eye makeup removers). The general class of householdcleansers includes laundry detergents, hard surface cleansers, poroussurface cleansers, dishwashing detergents, window cleansers, scouringcleansers and disinfectant cleansers. Although each of these productscontains a specific set of specialized ingredients depending upon theparticular end use of the product, they all contain surfactants.

The most common type of cleansing product is a liquid or a powderformulation. However, cleansing products can also be in such forms as anaerosol, a mousse, a gel, an emulsion, a discrete packet, or impregnatedon a towelette. Although these cleansers come in many different forms,they all have in common the presence of a surfactant.

In view of their ubiquitous use, surfactants in cleansing products oftencome into contact with human skin. Although this contact may be brief oreven secondary (as for instance clothing washed with laundry detergent),it is desirable that cleansing products have a minimal dermatologiceffect. Unfortunately, surfactants often cause irritation, dryness,cracking and peeling of the skin. Additionally, there are known casereports in the dermatological literature documenting allergic dermatitisin response to contact with a cleansing product. The allergic reactioncan be caused by the fragrance contained in the cleansing product, or bythe surfactant itself. In general, if a surfactant system can be applieddirectly to human skin without causing irritation, it will be safe foruse in products used to cleanse materials that contact the skin (such aslaundry detergent), or in products with limited direct contact with theskin (such as household products, including hard surface cleansers,window cleansers, and automotive cleansers).

Numerous patents have issued which concern cleansing products thatinclude surfactants, and mixtures of surfactants, which are designed tobe mild to the skin (e.g., U.S. Pat. No. 5,908,617; U.S. Pat. No.5,785,979; U.S. Pat. No. 5,663,137; U.S. Pat. No. 5,632,978; U.S. Pat.No. 5,567,359; U.S. Pat. No. 5,562,912; U.S. Pat. No. 5,480,633; U.S.Pat. No. 5,322,643; U.S. Pat. No. 5,252,246; U.S. Pat. No. 5,096,608;U.S. Pat. No. 5,084,212; U.S. Pat. No. 5,073,293; U.S. Pat. No.5,015,414; U.S. Pat. No. 4,968,450; U.S. Pat. No. 4,812,253; U.S. Pat.No. 4,673,525). However, each of these formulations has limitations.These limitations include limited foam volume, an undesired skin feel ofthe foam, instability, etc. that require the addition of other agents,some of which are not commercially available. Thus there is a need for asurfactant composition that is mild to the skin and eyes and can beeasily produced.

SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION

A surfactant composition has been discovered that is mild to the skin,leaves the skin barrier intact, is stable, can be formulated into anytype of cleansing preparation, and uses commonly available surfactants.In addition to being gentle to the skin, the surfactant composition isextremely mild to eye tissue, and is therefore suitable for contact lenssolutions or other cleansers (such as shampoos) that contact the eye.The surfactant composition has a stable viscosity and an acceptable skinfeel without the addition of polymeric materials.

A composition for cleansing is disclosed. The composition includes atleast about 2% of a mixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and asalt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, at least about 3% of a saltof an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, at least about 1% of an amphotericsurfactant, at least about 0.05% of an alkyl glucoside, and at leastabout 0.005% of a phospholipid.

A cleansing composition is also disclosed that includes about 2% toabout 70% of a mixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and a salt ofan ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, about 3% to about 40% of a salt ofan ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, about 1% to about 40% of an amphotericsurfactant, about 0.05% to about 10% of an alkyl glucoside, and about0.005% to about 10% of a phospholipid.

In addition, a cleansing composition is disclosed that includes about41% of a mixture of alkyl sulfoacetate and ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate, about 34% of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, about 22% ofan amphoteric surfactant, about 2% of an alkyl glucoside, and about 0.5%of a phospholipid.

A method of cleaning, including contacting a surface to be cleansed witha composition of the invention, is also described. The invention alsoincludes cleansing compositions to which the surfactant has been added.

The foregoing and other objects, features, and advantages of theinvention will become more apparent from the following detaileddescription of particular embodiments.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF SEVERAL EMBODIMENTS

Compositions including a combination of surfactants have been found thatare very mild (gentle) to the skin and eye tissues such that they causeminimal, if any, irritation of these tissues. Although materialscontained in the compositions are generally recognized as safe, thecombination causes less irritation to the tissues than would be expectedbased on the irritation caused by the components individually. Thecompositions do not require the presence of any known anti-irritantcompounds to achieve the level of safety found.

The compositions are unique for several additional reasons. They do notrequire the presence of ancillary materials to achieve levels of foamgenerally desired by consumers, and do not require the presence ofpolymeric materials to achieve a stable viscosity or skin feel oftendesired by consumers. Moreover, the compositions do not require thepresence of solubilizers and stabilizers to achieve a suitable productshelf life, even when stored at the extremes of temperature, such ashigh temperatures (as high as 50° C.) or low temperatures (less than 4°C.). This combination of effects is both unexpected and unique amongsurfactants.

DEFINITIONS

The terms “a” and “the” include the plural as well as the singular,unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

The term “surfactant” refers to a surface-active agent that reducessurface tension when dissolved in water or an aqueous solution, or whichreduces interfacial tension between two liquids, or between a liquid anda solid. Detergents, wetting agents and emulsifiers are examples ofsurfactants.

An “amphoteric” surfactant refers to a surfactant that has the capacityof behaving either as an acid or a base. Specific, non-limiting examplesof an amphoteric surfactant are betaine, sultaine, hydroxysultaine,imidazoline, aminoalkanoate, and iminoalkanoate surfactants.

The term “phospholipid” refers to a lipid compound that yields onhydrolysis phosphoric acid, an alcohol, a fatty acid, and a nitrogenousbase. Phospholipids include, but are not limited to, Coco PhosphatidylPG-Dimonium Chloride, Linoleamidopropyl Phosphatidyl PG-DimoniumChloride, Cocamidopropyl Phosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride,Borageamidopropyl Phosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride, StearamidopropylPhosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride, lecithin, and derivatives oflecithin.

The term “alkyl” refers to a cyclic, branched, or straight chain alkylgroup containing only carbon and hydrogen, and unless otherwisementioned contains one to thirty carbon atoms. This term is furtherexemplified by groups such as methyl, ethyl, n-propyl, isobutyl,t-butyl, pentyl, hexyl, heptyl, adamantyl, and cyclopentyl. Alkyl groupscan either be unsubstituted or substituted with one or moresubstituents, e.g. halogen, alkyl, alkoxy, alkylthio, trifluoromethyl,acyl, acyloxy, hydroxy, mercapto, carboxy, aryloxy, aryl, arylalkyl,heteroaryl, amino, alkylamino, dialkylamino, morpholino, piperidino,pyrrolidin-1-yl, piperazin-1-yl, or other functionality.

The term “lower alkyl” refers to a cyclic, branched or straight chainmonovalent alkyl radical of one to seven carbon atoms. This term isfurther exemplified by such radicals as methyl, ethyl, n-propyl,i-propyl, n-butyl, t-butyl, i-butyl (or 2-methylpropyl),cyclopropylmethyl, i-amyl, n-amyl, hexyl and heptyl. Lower alkyl groupscan also be unsubstituted or substituted. The term “higher alkyl” refersto a cyclic, branched or straight chain monovalent alkyl radical ofeight to thirty carbon atoms. Higher alkyl groups can also beunsubstituted or substituted.

The term “glycoside” refers to an organic compound which can be reducedby hydrolysis into sugars and other organic substances, known asglycones. The term “glucoside” refers to a glycoside which has glucoseas the sugar constituent. An “alkyl glucoside” includes the linear orbranched chain alcohols, including but not limited to those from coconutoils, palm oils, etc. or mixtures thereof.

“Hydroxyl” refers to —OH.

“Alcohol” refers to R-OH, wherein R is alkyl, especially lower alkyl(for example in methyl, ethyl or propyl alcohol), but can also be ahigher alcohol (for example decyl or dodecyl). An alcohol may be eitherlinear or branched, such as isopropyl alcohol.

“Carboxyl” refers to the radical —COOH, and substituted carboxyl refersto —COOR where R is alkyl, lower alkyl or a carboxylic acid or ester.

“Salt” refers to the compound formed when the hydrogen of an acid isreplaced by a metal or its equivalent (e.g., an NH₄ radical). The saltsinclude the monovalent ions (lithium, sodium and potassium, etc.), thedivalent ions (barium, calcium etc.), the trivalent ions (aluminum,etc.), or the ammonium based ions (ammonium, monoalkyl-, dialkyl-, andtrialkylammonium ion, such as triethanolammonium ion) or mixturesthereof.

Other chemistry terms herein are used according to conventional usage inthe art, as exemplified by The McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Chemical Terms(1985) and The Condensed Chemical Dictionary (1981).

SEVERAL EXAMPLES OF SURFACTANT COMPOSITION

Combinations of surfactants have been found that are very mild (gentle)to the skin and eye tissues such that they cause minimal, if any,irritation of these tissues. The composition includes least about 2% ofa mixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and a salt of anethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, at least about 3% of a salt of anethoxylated alkyl sulfate, at least about 1% of an amphotericsurfactant, at least about 0.05% of an alkyl glucoside, and at leastabout 0.005% of a phospholipid. Alternatively, the composition includesleast about 15% of a mixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and asalt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, at least about 10% of asalt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, at least about 10% of anamphoteric surfactant, at least about 0.05% of an alkyl glucoside, andat least about 0.05% of a phospholipid.

In one embodiment, the composition includes about 2% to about 70% of amixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and a salt of an ethoxylatedalkyl sulfosuccinate, about 3% to about 40% of a salt of an ethoxylatedalkyl sulfate, about 1% to about 40% of an amphoteric surfactant, about0.05% to about 10% of an alkyl glucoside, and about 0.005% to about 10%of a phospholipid. In another embodiment, the composition includes about15% to about 70% of a mixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and asalt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, about 10% to about 40% of asalt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, about 10% to about 40% of anamphotheric surfactant, about 0.05% to about 10% of an alkyl glucoside,and about 0.05% to about 10% of a phospholipid.

Salts of an alkyl sulfoacetate are well known in the art, and any saltof an alkyl sulfoacetate can be used in the composition. One specific,non-limiting example of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate is a salt of alauryl sulfoacetate. Similarly, salts of an ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate are well known in the art, and any salt of an ethoxylatedalkyl sulfosuccinate can be used in the composition. A specific,non-limiting example of a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate isa salt of Laureth Sulfosuccinate.

One non-limiting example of a composition that is mild to the skin andeyes is a composition that includes:

Salt of Lauryl Sulfoacetate about 2% to about 70% and Salt of LaurethSulfosuccinate Salt of Laureth Sulfate about 3% to about 40% AmphotericSurfactant about 1% to about 40% Alkyl Glucoside about 0.05% to about10% Phospholipid about 0.005% to about 10%

A specific example within this range is:

Salt of Lauryl Sulfoacetate about 15% to about 70% and Salt of LaurethSulfosuccinate Salt of Laureth Sulfate about 10% to about 40% AmphotericSurfactant about 10% to about 40% Alkyl Glucoside about 0.05% to about10% Phospholipid about 0.05% to about 10%

Another non-limiting example of a surfactant composition that is mild tothe skin and eyes is:

Sodium Lauryl Sulfoacetate  34.90% and Disodium Laureth SulfosuccinateAmmonium Laureth Sulfate  34.62% Cocamidopropyl Betaine  23.08%Coco-Glucoside and Coconut Oil  6.49% Coco Phosphatidyl PG-DimoniumChloride  0.91% Total 100.00%

In general, the ratio of the agents included in the surfactantcomposition that is mild to the skin and eyes is from about 0.05 toabout 2.0 of a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, from about0.05 to about 1.5 of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate, from about 0.1 toabout 2.0 of a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, from about 0.05 toabout 3.0 of an amphoteric surfactant, from about 0.005 to about 1.0 ofan alkyl glucoside, and from about 0.0005 to about 0.5 of aphospholipid. More specifically, the ratio of agents included in thesurfactant composition that is mild to the skin and eyes is from about0.2 to about 1.5 of a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, fromabout 0.1 to about 1.0 of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate, from about0.2 to about 1.8 of a salt of a ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, from about0.05 to about 2.5 of an amphoteric surfactant, from about 0.1 to about0.7 of a alkyl glucoside, and from about 0.005 to about 0.1 of aphospholipid.

In one embodiment, the ratio of agents included in the surfactantcomposition is about 0.7 of a salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate, about 0.3 of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate, about 1.0of a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, about 0.7 of an amphotericsurfactant, about 0.2 of a alkyl glucoside, and about 0.02 of aphospholipid (about a 0.7:0.3:1.0:0.7:0.2:0.02 ratio). In anotherembodiment, the ratio of the salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinateto the salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate is from about 0.7:1 to about 6.6:1in the surfactant composition that is mild to the skin and eyes. In yetanother embodiment, the ratio of the salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate to the salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate is about 2.3:1.

In general, the ratio of the phospholipid to the other surfactantsincluded in this surfactant composition that is mild to skin and eyes isfrom to 1:10 to about 1:44 for a salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate, from about 1:1 to about 1:22 for a salt of an alkylsulfoacetate, from about 1:15 to about 1:60 for a salt of an ethoxylatedalkyl sulfate, from about 1:10 to about 1:40 for an amphotericsurfactant, and from about 1:0.5 to about 1:15 for an alkyl glucoside.More preferably, the ratio of phospholipid to the other surfactantsincluded in this surfactant composition is from about 1:20 to about 1:34for a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, from about 1:8 toabout 1:15 for a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate, from about 1:25 to about1:50 for a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, from about 1:20 toabout 1:30 for an amphoteric surfactant, and from about 1:2 to about1:12 for an alkyl glucoside. Most preferably, the ratio of phospholipidto the other surfactants included in this surfactant composition isabout 1:27 for a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, about 1:12for a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate, about 1:38 for a salt of anethoxylated alkyl sulfate, about 1:25 for an amphoteric surfactant, andabout 1:7 for an alkyl glucoside.

The alkyl glucoside can include several agents, such as linear orbranched chain alcohols, including but not limited to coconut oils, palmoils, etc. or mixtures thereof. In one embodiment, coconut oil isincluded in the alkyl glucoside.

A preservative can be included in the surfactant composition.Preservatives are well known to one of skill in the art. Examples ofpreservatives include, but are not limited to, DMDM Hydantion,Imidazolidinyl Urea, Diazolidinyl Urea, Benzyl Alcohol, CocoPhosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride, Parabens (including methyl-, ethyl-,propyl-, butyl-, isobutyl-, etc.), and Salts of EthylenediamineTetraacetate.

The surfactant composition can further include an agent to give opacityand/or pearlescence. Agents that give opacity and pearlescence are wellknown to one of skill in the art. Specific, non-limiting examples ofagents that give opacity and pearlescence are Ethylene GlycolDistearate, Propylene Glycol Distearate Polyoxypropylene Glycol (POP)Distearates, Polyoxyethylene Glycol (POE) Distearates,Polyoxyethylene/Polyoxypropylene (POE/POP) Distearate, any highmolecular weight distearates or similar fatty acids (dilaurates,dimyristates, dipalmitates etc.), and mica based pearlescent agents.

A skin feel additive can also be included in the composition. A “skinfeel additive” refers to an agent that creates or modifies the feel of aformulation on the skin. Skin feel additives are well known to one ofskill in the art. Skin feel additives include, but are not limited to,silicones, taurates, and proteins. In general, any emollient materialcan be used. In one embodiment, the skin feel additive is an emollientester, such as Octyl Palmitate, Cetearyl Octonoate. However, anynon-water soluble material, even mineral oil could be used for thispurpose.

An antioxidant can also be included in the composition. Non-limitingexamples of antioxidants of use in the composition include pro-vitamins,vitamins, plant extracts, enzymes, and oat derivatives. One of skill inthe art will readily be able to identify an antioxidant of use in asurfactant composition.

The composition can also include specialty ingredients that are designedto provide specialized functions to the composition. Examples ofspecialty ingredients are salts, colorants (such as pigments, dyes, foodgrade colors, etc.), vitamins (such as Vitamin C as an antioxidant),enzymes, alpha- or beta-hydroxy acids (to improve skin appearance), andplant-derived or animal-derived materials, including plant or animalextracts. One of skill in the art can readily identify specialtyingredients of use in a surfactant composition.

The cleansing composition can be introduced into an end product, such asa shower gel, shampoo, or contact lens solution. Such preparations wouldcontain from about 2% to about 50% of a mixture of a salt of a sodiumlauryl sulfoacetate and Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate, from about 3%to about 35% of Ammonium Laureth Sulfate, from about 1% to about 30% ofCocamidopropyl Betaine, from about 0.05% to about 8% of Coco-Glucosideand Coconut Oil, and from 0.005% to about 5% of a phospholipid. In oneembodiment, such preparations would contain from about 5% to about 40%of a mixture of a salt of a sodium lauryl sulfoacetate and DisodiumLaureth Sulfosuccinate, from about 5% to about 30% of Ammonium LaurethSulfate, from about 3% to about 20% of Cocamidopropyl Betaine, fromabout 0.5% to about 5% of Coco-Glucoside and Coconut Oil, and from 0.05%to about 3% of a phospholipid. One formulation containing the surfactantcomposition is the following liquid shower gel formulation:

Percentage (w/w) Ingredients General Formula Specific Formula SodiumLauryl Sulfoacetate and 29.00 29.0000  Disodium Laureth SulfosuccinateWater 39.15 25.4846  Ammonium Laureth Sulfate 24.00 24.0000 Cocamidopropyl Betaine 16.00 16.0000  Coco-Glucoside and Coconut Oil 1.35 1.3500 Coco Phosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride  0.50 0.5000Preservatives q.s. 2.1000 Ethylene Glycol Distearate  0.50 0.5000Fragrance  0.45 0.4500 Skin Feel Additives — 0.3000 Antioxidants —0.6054 Specialty Ingredients — 0.2100 Total 100.00  100.0000 

In general, the composition of the invention is a surfactant compositionthat serves as a concentrate. The concentrated surfactant composition isthen diluted in a diluent for use in cleansing. Depending upon the typeof product desired, the surfactant composition is incorporated as fromabout 0.5 to about 90% of the final formulation used for cleansing.Diluents are well known to one of skill in the art. Specific,non-limiting examples of diluents of use are water, solvents such as thelower alkyl alcohols (methyl, ethyl, propyl, isopropyl, butyl, etc.), ora mixture of water and a lower alkyl alcohol.

The compositions can be used in almost any conceivable type of personalcare or household product that comes into contact with the skin. Theproduct may be either a prescription product (such as a contact lenscare product) or an over-the-counter drug product (such as a shampoo).Non-limiting examples of products include shampoos, soaps, body washes,mouthwashes, toothpastes, oral rinses, personal hygiene products, facialscrubs, facial cleansers, wound cleansers, contact lens cleansers, eyemakeup removers, laundry cleaners, dishwashing detergents, hard surfacecleaners, disinfectant cleanser, porous surface cleanser, and windowcleanser. The composition can be used to clean any surface of interest,by contacting the surface with a sufficient amount of the composition ofthe invention with a surface to be cleaned. Thus surfaces such as a hardsurface, a porous surface, a skin surface, a hair, a fabric or a mucousmembrane can be cleansed using a composition of the invention.

Example 1 Evaluation of Surfactant Mixtures for Irritation Potentialwith Patch Test

The lack of potential for the surfactant compositions of the inventionto produce irritation was evaluated by three separate techniques. Thefirst was by a 21 day cumulative irritation test under an occlusivepatch followed by a rechallenge test to assess the potential to elicitallergic sensitization reactions. The second method was by evaluatingthe potential to elicit ocular irritation in cell culture. The finalmethod was the lack of the potential of this surfactant mixture toelicit irritation as assessed by use with human subjects. All of thesetests clearly showed an absence of irritation for the surfactantcomposition. In all of these assay systems, including the user test,there was no significant irritation to any subject, cell or tissue ascompared to the controls.

Insult Patch Test

A 21-day repeat insult patch test with rechallenge was conducted at anoutside laboratory under the supervision of a certified toxicologist anda board-certified dermatologist. This test involved the application ofapproximately 0.2 g of a 0.5% composition formulated into a liquidshower gel formulation under a Parke-Davis Readi-Bandage occlusivepatch. The patch was applied for a 24 hour period every Monday andWednesday and for 48 hours every Friday for a three week period (a totalof nine patch applications). The skin test site was allowed to rest for24 hours before the application of each subsequent patch. Prior to theapplication of each occlusive patch, the skin was graded by a trainedobserver according to the following 6-point scale:

0=No evidence of any effect

+=Barely perceptible Erythema (Minimal, faint, uniform or spotty)

1=Mild Erythema (Pink, uniform covering moist of the contact site)

2=Moderate Erythema (Pink-red, uniform in the entire site)

3=Moderate Erythema (Bright red, with/without petechiae or papules)

4=Severe Erythema (Deep red, with/without vesiculaton or weeping)

In addition to rating the irritation observed, any other changes in theskin were noted and recorded such as edema, dryness, hypo- andhyper-pigmentation, etc. These other changes were also rated as eithermild, moderate or severe.

Results

Based upon this scale, the following results were found for eachevaluation point:

Irritation Scores Patch Number + 1 1 2 0 2 1 0 3 1 0 4 1 0 5 1 0 6 1 0 70 1 8 1 1 9 2 0

Following a two-week rest, the test formulation was applied again underan occlusive patch to a virgin test site for 24 hours and gradedimmediately after removal of the patch and at 72 hours following patchremoval. This portion of the test evaluated the allergic sensitizationpotential of the test material. No evidence was found for any allergicpotential from the surfactant composition of the invention.

Generally, surfactant solutions elicit a significant number of grade 1reactions in up to 50% of the panelists, grade 2 reactions in up to 15to 20% of the panelists, and grade 3 reactions in as many as 2 to 5% ofthe panelists. Thus the irritation scores obtained with a surfactantcomposition of the present invention are extremely low. This is highlyunusual for a surfactant solution, even a 0.5% solution, appliedrepeatedly to the same site under occlusion. These values clearly showthat the surfactant composition is extremely mild and gentle to theskin.

Example 2 Bovine Ocular Opacity and Permeability Assay

A surfactant composition of the invention was also shown to be mild tothe eye using a test for opacity and permeability.

The Bovine Ocular Opacity and Permeability Assay

The Bovine Ocular Opacity and Permeability Assay was conducted on bovinecorneas from eyes freshly collected in a local abattoir and evaluated bytwo end-points: opacity and permeability. The objective values obtainedfrom both parameters were used to calculate the in vitro score. Based ona previously established scale, irritation was classified into threebroad categories: mild, moderate and severe.

Bovine eyes were collected in an appropriate container containing Hank'sBalanced Salt Solution (HBSS) at a pH of 7.4±0.3. Medium storage andtransportation of eyes to the laboratory was performed at roomtemperature. The eyes were used within two (2) hours of collection.

All eyes were carefully examined, with a stereomicroscope if necessary.Eyes presenting any defects, such as neovascularization, pigmentation,opacity, or scratches were discarded. Selected corneas were dissectedwith a 2-3 mm rim of sclera for easier handling and stored in acontainer with HBSS until use. The iris and lens was removed, and thecorneas were mounted in holders, with the endothelial side applied onthe O-ring of the posterior part of the holder. The anterior part of theholder was placed against the epithelial side of the cornea and held inplace with three screws. The holder compartments were then filled,posterior compartment first, with pre-warmed Eagle's Minimum EssentialMedia with 1% FBS (EMEMF) at a pH of 7.5±0.3 (approximately 32±2° C.).The corneas were then incubated for approximately one hour in a waterbath at approximately 32±2° C. to allow pre-equilibration of the corneasto the external medium.

During the pre-equilibration period, the opacitometer was calibratedwith no cornea using the calibration set. The electrical zero (balancebetween photocells) was adjusted to “0” with the balance knob, and theapparatus was then set to “75” with a standard opaque sheet of polyesterplaced in the “positive” compartment.

After the corneas pre-equilibrated for approximately one hour, bothchambers of the holder cassettes were aspirated (anterior compartmentfirst) and refilled with EMEMF (posterior compartment first). Initialopacities were then read (initial corneal opacities had to be low(±0.03) to be included in the study; corneas with higher initialopacities were not used), and the corneas with the lowest opacity scoreswere selected as negative controls. The EMEMF was removed from theanterior compartment, and the anterior compartment was then dosed withthe test material or control as follows:

Liquids—A volume of 0.750 ml of test material or control (pre-warmed toapproximately 32±2° C.) was pipetted into the anterior compartment. Thetest material was distributed uniformly on the corneal surface byrotating the holder with the cornea maintained in a vertical position(holes are plugged with caps). The corneas were then incubated in avertical position for 10 minutes at approximately 32±2° C. in a waterbath. The corneas were timed individually with one cornea being dosedand added to the water bath at regular intervals. After incubation, thetest material was removed, and the epithelium was washed at least threetimes (until the medium is clear) with EMEMF. All of the corneas werecollected and the anterior compartment refilled with EMEMF. The corneaswere then incubated for approximately 2 hours at approximately 32±2° C.in a water bath. After incubation, the posterior and anteriorcompartments of the holder were refilled with fresh EMEMF and thecorneal opacity was again measured.

Solids—A 20% (w/w) suspension of the solid test in saline was prepared.A volume of 0.750 ml of this suspension was pipetted into the anteriorcompartment as mentioned for liquid samples above. The procedure listedabove for liquids was then followed exactly except for the fact that thesamples were incubated with the suspension of the test sample for 4hours instead of 10 minutes at approximately 32±2° C.

Controls—A positive control was included in each group of productstested. A 5% (w/w) solution of Benzalkonium chloride (BAC) in saline wasemployed as the control for all liquid and surfactants-containing testsamples. A 20% suspension of Imidazole in saline was employed for allnon-surfactant-containing solid test samples. The appropriate controlwas treated the same as the test samples in the procedure listed above.A negative control, saline solution, was also run with each set ofcorneas tested.

The opacity of the corneas treated with the test samples and controlsamples were measured by placing the cornea holders, in turn, in the“positive” compartment of the opacitometer while leaving the “negative”compartment empty. The values displayed were recorded. The glass portionof each holder was dried prior to each opacity measurement.

Permeability of the corneas was determined as follows: The EMEMF isremoved from the anterior chamber of each holder/cassette. A stocksolution of fluorescein was prepared at 4-5% in Dubelcco's PhosphateBuffered Saline (DPBS) at pH 7.5±0.3, and diluted to 0.4-0.5% in EMEMF.One (1) milliliter of the 0.4-0.5% fluorescein solution was added to theanterior compartment and the corneas were incubated in a verticalposition in a water bath for approximately 90 minutes at approximately32±2° C. A 200 microliter portion of media from the posteriorcompartment of each holder/cassette was removed and its optical densitywas measured spectrophotometrically at 490 nm in a plate-reader against200 microliters of EMEMF as a blank.

Five corneas were evaluated for each test sample and control. Theopacity of each cornea tested was measured in triplicate (test samplesand control samples). The Delta Opacity (DO) values were calculated foreach cornea by adjusting for the initial opacity measurement. A mean DOvalue was then calculated from the DO values for each of the fivecorneas tested. Each mean DO was then corrected using the mean DO valuesfor the negative control (saline solution) to obtain the mean opacityoptical density (MOOD). The permeability value was then determined fromthe optical density of the EMEMF-containing-fluorescein sample for eachtreated cornea and then corrected using the mean value recorded for thenegative control (saline solution) treated corneas. The corrected meanoptical density (MPOD) of each test product and positive control wasthen calculated.

The in-vitro score for each test product and positive control wascalculated according to the following formula:

In-Vitro Score=MOOD+(15×MPOD)

The rating of ocular irritation potential of each material tested wasdetermined according to the following scale:

In-Vitro Score Rating  0.0 to 5.0 Non-Irritant  5.0 to 25.0 MildIrritant 25.1 to 55.0 Moderate Irritant 55.1 and above Severe Irritant

Results

The results of the Bovine Ocular Opacity assay revealed that thesurfactant composition contained in the shower gel formulation was anon-irritant when tested both as a 0.5 and 1% solution in distilledwater. In fact, the in-vitro scores of −0.07 for the 0.5% solution and−0.95 for the 1% solution of the surfactant composition contained in theshower gel formulation were not different from the value of 0.00obtained for distilled water.

Example 3 Gentleness/Mildness of the Surfactant Composition on IntactHuman Skin

In addition to testing this surfactant composition for safety, thecomposition contained in a shower gel formulation was tested on intacthuman skin for its effect on the skin's barrier properties bydetermining the effect of the surfactant composition on the capacitanceof the skin. The surfactant composition was shown to be mild uponapplication to human skin.

Measurement of the Moisture Content of Human Skin

The effect of surfactant compositions on the moisture content of theskin was measured using an instrument that measures the capacitance ofthe skin, namely a Nova™Meter. The capacitance of the skin is directlyrelated to its moisture content. The moisture content of the skin wasmeasured on the skin prior to the application of the test products. Aspecific amount of a 10% solution of each of the test products was thenapplied to separate skin sites on a group of six (6) subjects. The testproducts were allowed to remain in contact with the skin for a specificperiod of time and then rinsed off the skin using warm distilled water.The control site was only treated with the warm distilled water rinse.Skin moisture measurements were subsequently measured at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, 6and 24 hours.

Results

The results of the Nova™Meter readings of each of the test sites areshown below (Table 1). The formulation for a shower gel product wascompared to a 10% solution of Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS). SLS is acommon surfactant used in skin and hair cleansing preparations.

TABLE 1 Measurement of Moisture Content of the Skin Time of ExperimentalEvaluation (Hrs.) Shower Gel Solution of SLS Untreated Site 0.0 215 214213 0.5 191 178 200 1.0 188 165 201 2.0 202 175 207 4.0 211 193 214 6.0218 210 217 24.0  217 215 216

When evaluated using a matched pairs statistical comparison and a 95%confidence limit, the skin treated with the shower gel formulation madefrom a surfactant composition of the invention was statistically lessmoist than that of the untreated sites at 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 hours only.The values for the SLS solution treated skin were statistically lessmoist than that of the untreated site at 0.5, 1, 2, 4, and 6 hours.However, the skin treated with the shower gel formulation made from asurfactant composition of the invention was statistically more moistthan those treated with SLS at every evaluation point except for theinitial reading (before the application of the test materials). It isalso apparent (given the values shown in Table 1) that the skin treatedwith the shower gel formulation made from a surfactant composition ofthe invention returned to normal readings much more rapidly than that ofthose for the SLS treated skin. These results clearly show that theshower gel formulation made from a surfactant composition of theinvention was milder and gentler than the SLS solution when applied tohuman skin. SLS disrupted the skin's barrier properties, while theshower gel formulation made from a surfactant composition of theinvention did not.

Example 4 Comparative Evaluation of Surfactant Mixtures for IrritationPotential with Patch Test

A repeat insult patch test (RIPT, see Example 1) was conducted tocompare the surfactant compositions of the invention to other skincleanser products. The surfactant mixture formulations that were testedare shown below in Table 2.

TABLE 2 Formulas for Experimental Test Formulas A and B Percentage (w/w)Enfuselle ® Moisturizing Experimental Experimental Ingredients ShowerGel Formula A Formula B Water 25.4846  29.6500  29.1500  Sodium LaurylSulfoacetate 29.0000  29.0000  29.0000  and Disodium LaurethSulfoacetate Ammonium Laureth Sulfate 24.0000  24.0000  24.0000 Cocamidopropyl Betaine 16.0000  16.0000  16.0000  Coco-Glucoside andCoconut 1.3500 1.3500 1.3500 Oil Benzyl Alcohol 0.9500 — — CocoPhosphatidyl PG- 0.5000 — 0.5000 Dimonium Chloride Glycol Distearate0.5000 — — Fragrance 0.4500 — — Panthenol, 50% in Water 0.4000 — —Dimethicone Copolyol 0.2000 — — Methylparaben 0.2000 — — Sodium Benzoate0.2000 — — Sodium Polyasparte 0.1000 — — Sodium Methyl Cocoyl 0.1000 — —Taurate Tocopheryl Acetate 0.1000 — — Propylparaben 0.1000 — — DisodiumEDTA 0.1000 — — Butylene Glycol, Water, 0.1000 — — and Algae ExtractBeta Glucan 0.1000 — — Butylparaben 0.0500 — — Sea Water 0.0100 — —Magnesium Ascorbyl Phos- 0.0040 — — phate Retinyl Palmitate and 0.0005 —— Tocopherol Grape Seed Extract 0.0005 — — Superoxide Dismutase 0.0004 —— Total 100.0000  100.0000  100.0000 

These formulations were tested relative to cleanser products that arecurrently on the market. Since the exact formulations for the cleanserproducts tested are the trade secret of their respective manufacturers,the information listed in Table 3 only shows the ingredients containedin those formulations as described in the cosmetic ingredientdeclarations found on the packages of these marketed products.

TABLE 3 Ingredient Listing of Products Tested for Comparison AnalysisCompetitive Product Ingredient Listing Lancome Water, TEA LaurylSulfate, Sodium Laureth Sulfate, Tresor Fragrance, Polysorbate 20,Cocamidopropyl Betaine, Perfumed Bath Acrylate/Steareth-20 MethacrylateCopolymer, And Shower Cocamide MEA, Phenoxyethanol, Benzophenone-4, Gel(Lancome, Methylparaben, Propylparaben, Sodium Hydroxide, Inc.)Triethanolamine, Polyquaternium-7, Propylene Glycol, Disodium EDTA, AloeBarbadensis (Aloe Barbadensis) Gel, Bisabolol, Triclosan, Sea Rocket(Cakile Maritima) Extract, Algae (Algae) Extract, Glycerin, CrithmumMaritimum (Crithmum Maritimum) Extract, Pacific Sea Kelp (MacrocystisPyrifera) Extract, FD&C Red No. 4, D&C Yellow No. 10 Estee LauderPurified Water, Sodium Laureth Sulfate, Lauramide Beautiful DEA,Lauramidopropyl Betaine, Fragrance, Sodium Bath and Phosphate,Linoleamide DEA, PEG-20 Methyl Glucose Shower Gelee Sesquistearate,Tocopheryl Acetate, TEA Lauryl Sulfate, (Estee Lauder) Sodium LaurylSulfate, Methylcellulose, Isopropyl Alcohol, Disodium Phosphate, SodiumChloride, Butylene Glycol, Disodium EDTA, Sodium Metabisulfate,Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, Potassium Sorbate, Guanine,FD&C Red No. 4, Ext. D&C Violet No. 2 Liz Claiborne Water, TEA LaurylSulfate, Sodium Laureth Sulfate, Bath and Cocamidopropyl Betaine, PEG-40Hydrogenated Castor Shower Oil, Aloe Vera (Aloe Barbadensis) Gel,Fragrance, PEG- Gel (Liz 150 Pentaerythrityl Tetrastearate, LauramideDEA, Claiborne Glycerin, Oat Beta Glucan, Propylene Glycol, GrapeCosmetics) Seed Oil, Benzophenone-4, Disodium EDTA, Diazolidinyl Urea,Methylparaben, Propylparaben, BHT, FD&C Yellow No. 6, FD&C Yellow No. 5Neutrogena Purified Water, Sodium Laureth Sulfate, RainbathCocamidopropyl Betaine, Glycerin, Sodium Cocoyl Moisture RichIsethionate, Sodium Methyl Cocoyl Taurate, Disodium Shower andCocoamphodiacetate, Polyquaternium-7, Bath Gel LinoleamidopropylPG-Dimonium Chloride Phosphate, (Neutrogena IsostearamidopropylLaurylacetodimonium Chloride, Corp.) Aloe Extract, Panthenol,Methylparaben, DMDM Hydantion, Ethylparaben, Tetrasodium EDTA, E&C GreenNo. 5, Caramel, Fragrance

Sixty-two test subjects were enrolled in this test. Ten (10) subjectsdid not complete the test for reasons unrelated to the test itself orthe products tested. Therefore, the results were obtained for the 52test subjects who completed the test procedure.

There were 9 patches applied during the induction phase and 1 patchapplied during the challenge phase (see Example 1). The data shown inTable 4 shows the total percentage of test subjects experiencingreactions during these two test phases.

TABLE 4 Percentage of Test Subjects Experiencing Reactions Only DuringOnly During During Total Induction Challenge Both Number ofProduct/Formulation Phase Phase Phases Reactors Lancome Tresor 34 0 5 39Perfumed Bath and Shower Gel Estee Lauder Beautiful 30 1 7 38 Bath andShower Gelee Liz Claiborne Sport 32 2 4 38 Bath and Shower Body GelNeutrogena Rainbath 26 1 2 29 Moisture Rich Shower and Bath GelEnfuselle ® Moistur- 22 0 4 26 izing Shower Gel Experimental Formula 184 5 27 B Experimental Formula 18 0 2 21 A

The Enfuselle® Moisturizing Shower Gel and the two additionalformulations (Experimental Formulas A and B) exhibited the lowestreaction rate of any of the products/formulations tested. This is trueexcept for the challenge phase on Experimental Formula B. However, it isimportant to note that all of the reactions observed for ExperimentalFormula B were “+” reactions (barely perceptible erythema (see Example1)), which are the most minimal reaction observable according to theevaluation system used in this test.

The data presented in Table 5 demonstrates the total number of reactionsfound during both phases of the test. The number of reactions observedfor the Enfuselle® Moisturizing Shower Gel and formulations A and B werelower than any of the competitive skin cleansing products tested.

TABLE 5 Results of RIPT^(a) Number of Number of Number of Total of + 1Graded 2 Graded Number of Product or Graded Sites Sites ReactionsFormulation Sites Found Found Found Found^(c) Lancome Tresor 160 29 1190 Perfumed Bath and Shower Gel Estee Lauder Beautiful 117 36 3 156Bath and Shower Gelee Liz Claiborne Sport 129 29 0 158 Bath and ShowerBody Gel Neutrogena Rainbath 99 12 0 111 Moisture Rich Shower and BathGel Enfuselle ® Moistur- 91 10 2 103 izing Shower Gel ExperimentalFormula 77 9 0 86 B Experimental Formula 72 5 0 77 A ^(a)The resultspresented are for both the induction and challenge phases of this test.^(b)The grading scale for irritation employed in this test is asfollows: +—Barely perceptible erythema (minimal, faint, uniform orspotty redness) 1—Mild erythema (pink, uniform redness covering most ofthe test site) 2—Moderate erythema (marked redness visible uniformthroughout the test site) 3—Severe erythema (definite bright rednesswith or without petechiae or papules) 4—Very severe erythema (deepredness with or without vesiculation or weeping) ^(b)No irritationgreater than a grade 2 was found for any of the samples tested.

When the results from only the induction phase were analyzed, the dataclearly indicated that the Enfuselle® Moisturizing Shower Gel andformulations A and B are milder than those of the related products. Thesame trend was found for the results of the challenge phase, althoughsome reactions were noted for Experimental Formula B. However, as notedabove, all of the reactions observed for Formula B were “+” reactions.These are the least severe reactions observable and were comparable innumber (but not servity) to the reactions found for the Estee LauderBeautiful Bath and Shower Gelee and Liz Claiborne Sport Bath and ShowerGel.

Based upon these results, the Enfuselle® Moisturizing Shower Gel andcomponent formulations A and B have been demonstrated to be very mild tothe skin. Clearly, these formulations are milder to the skin than skincleanser products found in the currently marketed products. The resultsclearly demonstrates that the Enfuselle® Moisturizing Shower Gel andFormulations A and B are unique among skin cleanser formulations interms of their gentleness to the skin. According to the data presented,that uniqueness is a result of the specific combination of cleansingagents used in these formulations.

Example 5 Comparative Evaluation of Skin Moisture Content FollowingApplication to the Skin

Results of the effect of skin cleanser preparations on the moisturelevels of the skin are shown in Example 3. The Enfuselle® MoisturizingShower Gel and Formulas A and B (see Table 2) were compared to severalrelated products (see Table 3) using the measurement of moisture contentof human skin described in Example 3.

The results in Table 6 show the moisture content intact human skinresulting from the application of these competitive skin cleanserproducts and the Enfuselle® Moisturing Shower Gel component formulations(Experimental Formulas A and B) as well as a control site that was onlytreated with warm water.

TABLE 6 Moisture Content of Skin Following Application of Skin CleanserTime of Estee Evaluation Lauder Lancome Claiborne Neutrogena (Hrs)^(a)Control Beautiful Tressor Sport Rainbath Formula A Formula B 0.0 204.4203.1 204.1 204.3 203.8 204.5 204.5 1.0 189.7 172.0 162.1 162.2 172.0181.9 181.1 2.0 196.4 182.9 170.3 175.0 182.0 193.0 192.8 4.0 202.3192.1 186.9 189.6 192.0 200.3 200.7 6.0 203.7 197.8 196.2 196.2 199.9203.1 203.1 24.0 204.1 203.8 204.5 204.3 203.8 203.8 203.6

A matched pairs statistical analysis was then conducted for the datashown in Table 6. These statistical comparisons clearly demonstrate thatthe Enfuselle® Moisturizing Shower Gel and Formulation A and FormulationB have an effect upon skin moisture levels following application to theskin. In fact, even though all of the competitive products and theEnfuselle® Moisturizing Shower Gel component formulations have an effectupon skin moisture levels for the first two (2) hours of the test,Experimental Formula B (which contains all of the cleansing ingredientsof the Enfuselle® Moisturizing Shower Gel), has the least effect uponthe skin's moisture levels. Furthermore, although the initial resultssuggested that Experimental Formula A had a greater effect on skinmoisture levels than Experimental Formula B, the lower skin moisturelevels found for Formula A were not statistically significant.

The only other skin cleanser preparation found to be statisticallysimilar to the untreated skin site (aside from that observed at 24hours) is the Neutrogena Rainbath Moisture Rich Shower and Bath Gel atthe 6 hours observation point. However, the data clearly showed that theskin moisture levels for this product treated site at the 6 hourobservation point were lower than that found for either ExperimentalFormulas A or B. Thus, Experimental Formula A and B demonstratedsuperior results to even the Rainbath Moisture Rich Shower and Bath Gel.

The data shown in Table 7 are calculated in terms of percentage changefrom baseline values.

TABLE 7 Percentage Change in the Moisture Content of Skin FollowingApplication of Skin Cleanser^(a) Time of Estee Evaluation Lauder LancomeClaiborne Neutrogena (Hrs)^(b) Control Beautiful Tressor Sport RainbathFormula A Formula B 0.0 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.0 −7.07−15.19 −20.48 −20.49 −15.43 −10.92 −11.30 2.0 −3.90 −9.86 −16.47 −14.33−10.62 −5.59 −5.67 4.0 −1.00 −5.31 −8.29 −7.16 −5.63 −2.02 −1.86 6.0−0.30 −2.54 −2.94 −3.97 −1.78 −0.68 −0.68 24.0 −0.12 0.30 0.16 −0.01−0.03 −0.31 −0.41 ^(a)The reported percentage change in skin moisturecontent (PCSMC) is the average of the percentage change in skin moisturecontent (SMC) for all test subjects calculated from the followingequation for each test subject at each measurement point: PCSMC = 100 ×[(SMC_(t) − SMC₀)/SMC₀] ^(b)Time at which the moisture content of theskin was measured using a NOVA ™ Meter. All times were measured from thetime of application of the test product except for the initial readingwhich was made before treating the skin.

These results clearly show the reduced loss of skin moisture forFormulas A and B as compared to other skin cleanser products. This dataalso shows that the component formulations A and B return to normal skinmoisture levels more rapidly than the competitive skin cleanserproducts. The data shown indicate that the two component formulations(Formulation A and B) are not statistically different from one another.In addition, Formulation A and B are more statistically similar to thedata for the control site than any of the other skin cleanser productstested.

These results demonstrate that the surfactant formulations of theinvention are very mild to human skin. Since this mildness comes from acombination of conventional skin cleansers, this result is not onlyunexpected, but is also novel and unique.

In view of the many possible embodiments to which the principles of theinvention may be applied, it should be recognized that the illustratedembodiments are examples of the invention, and should not be taken as alimitation on the scope of the invention. Rather, the scope of theinvention is defined by the following claims. We therefore claim as ourinvention all that comes within the scope and spirit of these claims.

We claim:
 1. A composition for cleansing, comprising at least 2% of amixture of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and a salt of an ethoxylatedalkyl sulfosuccinate, at least 3% of a salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfate, at least 1% of an amphoteric surfactant, at least 0.05% of analkyl glucoside, and at least 0.005% of a phospholipid.
 2. Thecomposition of claim 1, comprising the mixture of a salt of an alkylsulfoacetate and a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate in aconcentration of about 2 to 70%.
 3. The composition of claim 1, whereinthe salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate comprises a C8-C30 alkyl sulfoacetate.4. The composition of claim 3, wherein the salt of an alkyl sulfoacetateis selected from the group consisting of a monovalent salt, a divalentsalt, and a trivalent salt.
 5. The composition of claim 4, wherein themonovalent salt is selected from the group consisting of an ammonium, asodium, a lithium and a potassium salt.
 6. The composition of claim 4,wherein the monovalent salt is selected from the group consisting of amonoalkylammonium ion, a dialkylammonium ion, a trialkylammonium ion, ahydroxylated alkyl ammonium ion, a monoethanolammonium ion, adiethanolammonium ion, and a triethanolammonium ion.
 7. The compositionof claim 4, wherein the divalent salt is selected from the groupconsisting of a calcium, a magnesium and a barium salt.
 8. Thecomposition of claim 1, wherein the salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate is asalt of a lauryl sulfoacetate.
 9. The composition of claim 8, whereinthe salt of a lauryl sulfoacetate is sodium lauryl sulfoacetate.
 10. Thecomposition of claim 1, wherein the salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate is a C8-C30 ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate.
 11. Thecomposition of claim 1, wherein the salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate is selected from the group consisting of a monovalentsalt, a divalent salt, and a trivalent salt.
 12. The composition ofclaim 11, wherein the monovalent salt is selected from the groupconsisting of a sodium, an amonium, a lithium and a potassium salt. 13.The composition of claim 11, wherein the monovalent salt is selectedfrom the group consisting of a monoalkylammonium ion, a dialkylammoniumion, a trialkylammonium ion, a hydroxylated alkyl ammonium ion, amonoethanolammonium ion, a diethanolammonium ion, and atriethanolammonium ion.
 14. The composition of claim 11, wherein thedivalent salt is selected from the group consisting of a calcium, amagnesium and a barium salt.
 15. The composition of claim 1, wherein thesalt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate is disodium laurethsulfosuccinate.
 16. The composition of claim 1, comprising the salt ofthe ethoxylated alkyl sulfate in a concentration of about 3% to 40%. 17.The composition of claim 1, wherein the salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfate is selected from the group consisting of a monovalent salt, adivalent salt, and a trivalent salt.
 18. The composition of claim 17,wherein the wherein the monovalent salt is selected from the groupconsisting of an ammonium, a sodium, a lithium and a potassium salt. 19.The composition of claim 17, wherein the monovalent salt is selectedfrom the group consisting of a monoalkylammonium ion, a dialkylammoniumion, a trialkylammonium ion, a hydroxylated alkyl ammonium ion, amonoethanolammonium ion, a diethanolammonium ion, and atriethanolammonium ion.
 20. The composition of claim 17, wherein thedivalent salt is selected from the group consisting of a calcium, amagnesium and a barium salt.
 21. The composition of claim 1, wherein theethoxylated alkyl sulfate comprises ammonium laureth sulfate.
 22. Thecomposition of claim 1, comprising the amphoteric surfactant in aconcentration of about 1% to about 40%.
 23. The composition of claim 1,wherein the amphoteric surfactant is selected from the group consistingof a betaine, a sultaine, a hydroxysultaine, an imidazoline, anaminoalkanoate, and an iminoalkanoate.
 24. The composition of claim 1,wherein the amphoteric surfactant comprises cocamidopropyl betaine. 25.The composition of claim 1, comprising the alkyl glucoside in aconcentration of about 0.05% to 10%.
 26. The composition of claim 1,wherein the alkyl glucoside comprises a linear alcohol or a branchedchain alcohol.
 27. The composition of claim 1, wherein the alkylglucoside comprises a C8-C30 alkyl glucoside.
 28. The composition ofclaim 25, wherein the alkyl glucoside comprises coco-glucoside.
 29. Thecomposition of claim 1, comprising the phospholipid in a concentrationof about 0.005% to 10%.
 30. The composition of claim 1, wherein thephospholipid is selected from the group consisting of Coco PhosphatidylPG-Dimonium Chloride, Linoleamidopropyl Phosphatidyl PG-DimoniumChloride, Cocamidopropyl Phosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride,Borageamidopropyl Phosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride, StearamidopropylPhosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride, lecithin, and a derivative oflecithin.
 31. The composition of claim 1, further comprising apreservative.
 32. The composition of claim 31, wherein the preservativeis selected from the group consisting of DMDM Hydantion, ImidazolidnylUrea, Diazolidinyl Urea, Benzyl Alcohol, Coco Phosphatidyl PG-DimoniumChloride, a paraben, or a salt of ethylenediamine tetraacetate.
 33. Thecomposition of claim 1, further comprising less than about 1% ethyleneglycol distearate.
 34. The composition of claim 1, further comprising afragrance.
 35. The composition of claim 1, further comprising anantioxidant.
 36. The composition of claim 35, wherein the antioxidant isselected from the group consisting of a pro-vitamin, a vitamin, a plantextract, an enzyme and an oat derivative.
 37. The composition of claim1, further comprising a skin feel additive.
 38. The composition of claim37, wherein the skin feel additive is selected from the group consistingof a silicone, a taurate, an emollient, and a protein.
 39. Thecomposition of claim 1, further comprising an opacifier or a perlescentagent.
 40. The composition of claim 39, wherein the opacifier orpearlescent agent is selected from the group consisting of an EthyleneGlycol Distearate, a Propylene Glycol Distearate, a PolyoxypropyleneGlycol (POP) Distearate, a Polyoxyethylene Glycol (POE) Distearate, aPolyoxyethylene/Polyoxypropylene (POE/POP) Distearate, a high molecularweight distearate, a high molecular weight fatty acid, and a mica basedpearlescent agent.
 41. The composition of claim 1, comprising the saltof the ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate and the salt of the alkylsulfoacetate in a ratio of about 0.7:1 to 6.6:1.
 42. The composition ofclaim 1, comprising the salt of the ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate andthe salt of the alkyl sulfoacetate in the ratio of about 2.3:1.
 43. Thecomposition of claim 1, comprising a ratio of from about 0.05 to about2.0 of the salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate, from about 0.05to about 1.5 of a salt of an alkyl sulfoacetate, from about 0.1 to about2.0 of a salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate, from about 0.05 to about3.0 of an amphoteric surfactant, from about 0.005 to about 1.0 of analkyl glucoside, and from about 0.0005 to about 0.5 of a phospholipid.44. The composition of claim 1, wherein: (a) a ratio of the phospholipidto the salt of the ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate is from about 1:10to about 1:44; or (b) a ratio of the phospholipid to the salt of thealkyl sulfoacetate is from about 1:1 to about 1:22; or (c) a ratio ofthe phospholipid to the salt of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate is fromabout 1:15 to about 1:60; or (d) a ratio of the phospholipid to theamphoteric surfactant is from about 1:10 to about 1:40; or (e) a ratioof the phospholipid to the alkyl glucoside is from about 1:0.5 to about1:15.
 45. The composition of claim 1, wherein: (a) a ratio of thephospholipid to the salt of the ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate is fromabout 1:20 to about 1:34; (b) a ratio of the phospholipid to the salt ofthe alkyl sulfoacetate is from about 1:8 to about 1:15; (c) a ratio ofthe phospholipid to the salt of the ethoxylated alkyl sulfate is fromabout 1:25 to about 1:50; (d) a ratio of the phospholipid to theamphoteric surfactant is from about 1:20 to about 1:30; or (e) a ratioof the phospholipid to the alkyl glucoside is from about 1:2 to about1:12.
 46. The composition of claim 1, wherein: (a) a ratio of thephospholipid to the salt of the ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate isabout 1:27; or (b) a ratio of the phospholipid to the salt of the alkylsulfoacetate is about 1:12; or (c) a ratio of the phospholipid to thesalt of the ethoxylated alkyl sulfate is about 1:38; or (d) a ratio ofthe phospholipid to the amphoteric surfactant is about 1:25; or (e) aratio of the phospholipid to the alkyl glucoside is about 1:7.
 47. Acleansing composition, comprising: (a) about 2% to 70% of a mixture of asalt of an alkyl sulfoacetate and a salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate; (b) about 3% to 40% of a salt of an ethoxylated alkylsulfate; (c) about 1% to 40% of an amphoteric surfactant; (d) about0.05% to 10% of an alkyl glucoside; and (e) about 0.005% to 10% of aphospholipid.
 48. The composition of claim 46, wherein the salt of thealkyl sulfoacetate comprises a salt of lauryl sulfoacetate.
 49. Thecomposition of claim 46, wherein the salt of the ethoxylated alkylsulfosuccinate comprises a salt of laureth sulfosuccinate.
 50. Acomposition for cleaning, comprising: (a) about 41% of a mixture ofalkyl sulfoacetate and ethoxylated alkyl sulfosuccinate; (b) about 34%of an ethoxylated alkyl sulfate; (c) about 22% of a amphotericsurfactant; (d) about 2% of a alkyl glucoside; and (e) about 1% of aphospholipid.
 51. A diluted composition for cleansing, comprising about0.5% to 95% of the composition of claim
 1. 52. A composition forcleansing, comprising about 2% to 50% of a mixture of a salt of a sodiumlauryl sulfoacetate and Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate, about 3% to 35%of Ammonium Laureth Sulfate, about 1% to 30% of Cocamidopropyl Betaine,about 0.05% to 8% of Coco-Glucoside and Coconut Oil, and about 0.005% to5% of a phospholipid.
 53. The composition of claim 52, comprising about5% to 40% of a mixture of a salt of a sodium lauryl sulfoacetate andDisodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate, about 5% to 30% of Ammonium LaurethSulfate, about 3% to 20% of Cocamidopropyl Betaine, about 0.5% to 5% ofCoco-Glucoside and Coconut Oil, and about 0.05% to 3% of a phospholipid.54. A composition for cleansing, comprising about 29% Sodium LaurylSulfoacetate and Disodium Laureth Sulfosuccinate, 39% Water, 24%Ammonium Laureth Sulfate, 16% Cocamidopropyl Betaine, 1% Coco-Glucosideand Coconut Oil, and 0.05% Coco Phosphatidyl PG-Dimonium Chloride.
 55. Amethod for cleansing, comprising contacting a sufficiently cleansingamount of the composition of claim 1 with a surface to be cleaned. 56.The method of claim 55, wherein the surface is selected from the groupconsisting of a hard surface, a porous surface, a skin surface, a hair,a fabric and a mucous membrane.